Pet dogs exposed to the weed killer 2,4-D are dying of cancer at twice normal rates, according to a study just published in the JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE.[1] Dog owners who spray or dust their lawns with weed killers containing 2,4-D are doubling Fido's chances of getting cancer, the study shows. Dogs walk across, or roll in, herbicide-treated lawns and then ingest toxic chemicals when they lick their coats or paws. Popular lawn-care products containing 2,4-D include Weedone, Weed-B-Gone, and many others (see below).[2]

Naturally, children who play on treated lawns will also come in contact with the chemical; dogs and children can also track the chemical indoors where prolonged exposure to humans may occur, but, so far as we know, no one has yet studied effects of weed killers on children or other family members inhabiting treated home sites.

In the past decade, several studies of farmers, and a few of railroad workers, have shown a connection between exposure to 2,4-D and an increased risk of human cancers. This latest study shows that dogs get some of the same kinds of cancers from weed killers that farmers in Nebraska,[3] Kansas,[4] and Saskatchewan,[5] and workers in Sweden[6,7,8] are reported to get from using 2,4-D on crops and to clear weeds along railroad tracks. In humans, the cancers are known as soft tissue sarcomas (STS), malignant lymphomas, and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. In dogs, malignant lymphomas and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas predominate. The occurrence of such cancers in the American people has been rising slowly but steadily for several decades, tracking the emergence of the modern life style in which the dandelion-free lawn has come to symbolize the good life.[9] Non-Hodgkin's lymphomas--the kind dogs are reported to get most often from exposure to 2,4-D--have been the second fastest-growing cancer in humans in the U.S. during the past 15 years.

It is not clear exactly which components of weed killers are responsible for the cancers. There are three possible sources of the problem: (a) the active ingredient in the weed killer, (b) the so-called "inert" ingredients that are used as carriers for the chemicals that actually kill weeds, and (c) the dioxins that contaminate the active ingredients during manufacture.

About 600 million pounds of 2,4-D are spread on American soil each year by homeowners and farmers--about 60 million pounds of "active ingredients" and about 540 million pounds of "inert" ingredients that can include carbon tetrachloride (a carcinogen), chloroform (a carcinogen), chloroethane (a carcinogen) and 20 or more other ingredients that are labeled "inert" but which have well-known toxic properties. [10] Federal pesticide law does not require chemical companies to disclose what is in the "inert" ingredients in their products. Furthermore, federal law provides a $10,000 penalty for any government employee who reveals the make-up of "inert" ingredients in pesticides.

2,4-D and its closely-related chemical cousin, 2,4,5-T (which is now banned in the U.S.), are contaminated with dioxins during manufacture. Dioxins are extremely potent toxins that have a wide spectrum of effects in humans, wildlife, and laboratory animals (ses RHWN #249). A recent study by the National Institutes of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) revealed a 46% cancer increase among workers in factories manufacturing these weed killers. (See RHWN #219.) Previous studies by scientists employed by herbicide manufacturing companies (BASF and Monsanto) had purported to show no effects in workers but there is now a growing concern among government officials that some of these studies were falsified. [11]

People spread 2,4-D around their homes and gardens to kill broad-leaf weeds, crab grass and dandelions. Farmers use it on tomatoes to cause all fruits to ripen at the same time for machine harvesting, and to increase the red color in potatoes. Utility companies, highway departments, and railroads use it to clear brush beneath power transmission lines and along highways and tracks. It is used heavily on corn, sorghum, rice and other crops to keep weeds down. From 1962 to 1971 during the Vietnam War, 2,4-D and its chemical cousin 2,4,5-T mixed together formed Agent Orange; it was sprayed by soldiers and airmen to defoliate the jungle where the Vietcong were living. Thousands of GIs have filed lawsuits against the U.S. government and against individual companies that supplied components of Agent Orange, such as Monsanto, Dow, Uniroyal, Hercules, Diamond Shamrock and others. A recent study in the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH reveals that Vietnam veterans are 70% more likely to father children with one or more major birth defects, compared to men with no military service; it is unclear whether herbicide exposure is the most important cause. [12]

[2] Product names were gathered from a search on "2,4-D" in the National Library of Medicine's online Hazardous Substances Data Bank; to learn details of this online system, write National Library of Medicine, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20894.

[9] Kenneth P. Cantor and Others, "Distribution of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphomas in the United States Between 1950 and 1975," CANCER RESEARCH Vol. 40 (August, 1980), pgs. 2645-2652.

[10] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency staff members estimate that use of 2,4-D "active ingredient" is between 57 and 62 million pounds per year. Federal law does not allow EPA officials to gather exact data. See PESTICIDE INDUSTRY SALES AND USAGE; 1987 MARKET ESTIMATES (Washington, DC: Economic Analysis Branch, Biological and Economic Analysis Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, [U.S.] Environmental Protection Agency, September 1988), Table 9. However "active ingredients" account for only about 10% of an herbicide like 2,4-D; see Susan Jaffe, Michael Surgan, and Timothy P. Urban, THE SECRET HAZARDS OF PESTICIDES: INERT INGREDIENTS (Albany, NY: Office of the Attorney General, June, 1991), Table 1. Free copies of this Attorney General's report are available through the mail by contacting Office of Public Information, NY State Department of Law, 120 Broadway, NY, NY 10271. You can try to place a phone order by calling (212) 341-2000.

[11] See, for example, Leslie Roberts, "Monsanto Studies Under Fire," SCIENCE Vol. 251 (February 8, 1991), pg. 626. A Monsanto public relations spokesperson says the company's studies of worker health were sound; nevertheless, Roberts reports, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has recently opened a criminal investigation to determine whether Monsanto "falsified" three epidemiological studies of its workers. For further evidence of concern expressed by government officials, see RHWN #171.

[12] Ann Aschengrau and Richard R. Monson, "Paternal Military Service in Vietnam and the Risk of Late Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Vol. 80 (October, 1990), pgs. 1218-1224.

The above is a very old study... it was published almost 20 years ago.Weed-B-Gone is still used routinely - and often - especially in Florida. My landlord used it, as did the City of Coral Springs while I lived there.I had NO idea that this study even existed, or what the findings were.I am shocked that this chemical isn't banned by now.

Exposure to this pesticide is the one thing that Mick and Seppel have in common.

Christine, I'm glad you posted this. It's something that crossed my mind when we got Vinny's cancer diagnosis because he was so young. The city of Macomb (where I live) doesn't use Weed-B-Gone, but they do spray the entire city with insectides to keep down the mosquito population. You can smell it in the air for days after they spray. I do not use any weed or insect killers myself now, but I did use something a couple of years ago to kill the poison ivy that grew on my back fence. These are the kind of things we don't think about as being carcinogenic until someone points it out to us.

I'll ask Mark about this when he gets home. He is very very knowledgeable about pesticides. He has a CT Commercial pesticide applicator's license and an Arborist license. I'm curious if any of the chemicals he handles has this in it and if he's sprayed them in our yard.

TruGreen ChemLawn is one of the worst offenders in my book. They just don't give a damn about their employees or the environment. The stories I've heard from many many of the people that used to work there are simply frightening. Pesticide spills that go un-reported to the DEP, pesticides that are mixed by employees who do not even speak english and just guess at the correct amount of chemical to add into the water in their tanks, guys that just mix chemicals with out wearing the proper gear or taking care to measure the correct amounts into the tank, wrong houses sprayed & not notified, employees that get sick from exposure, failure to make sure that all pesticide applicators have blood work done every six months to check their exposure etc. etc. etc.

Moral courage is the most valuable and usually the most absent characteristic in men ~ General George S. Patton, Jr.

She taking all the stars down from her sky to hang them up someplace new, where there's better weather and the sky's a different blue. ~ Autumn Fields

HappyChick wrote: The city of Macomb (where I live) doesn't use Weed-B-Gone, but they do spray the entire city with insectides to keep down the mosquito population. You can smell it in the air for days after they spray.

Same in Coral Springs... and for the longest time I had no idea, because they do it around 3:00 am, and it's not publicly announced on a regular basis. Same w/public lawn care... you step in this pesticide crap constantly.It's mind-boggling to me that this stuff is still being distributed and used.

I know in CT that if pesticides are used, they are supposed to tag the property every so many feet. Doesn't matter if it's commercial, residential or municipal property, it MUST be tagged with the date, the companies name that did the application & what was applied.

Moral courage is the most valuable and usually the most absent characteristic in men ~ General George S. Patton, Jr.

She taking all the stars down from her sky to hang them up someplace new, where there's better weather and the sky's a different blue. ~ Autumn Fields

My Lab, Louie lived most of his life in a condo with me, and they always sprayed the grass with chemicals. While I tried to have most of his exercise in open fields and walking on streets with me, I always thought these chemicals contributed to his cancer.

Since the day I got him, he was always obsessive about licking (as Labs often do), but his licking was always his one foot.

His cancer started in that foot pad. He had the pad removed, then the digit, in attempt to stop the spreading.

That was an old study, but the information is still valid. Many pesticides are really terrible, especially for the people who apply them and for the animals who get most exposed to them. My research focuses on hormone disruptors--the synthetic chemicals that mess with hormones in our bodies--and the more I learn, the more I worry. Dogs are particularly vulnerable because they walk, breathe, roll in, and generally get exposed to a lot of the junk we spray on our lawns, fields, and homes. Chemicals in the drugs we take are regulated for safety (badly regulated, but at least someone is supposed to check to make sure they're safe) but the rest of chemicals aren't checked for safety at all. Over 70.000 chemicals are on the market that have never been tested. Those that have been tested cause all sorts of immune problems, cancer, and reproductive problems in lab animals.

Some chemicals are worth the risk--because I iive in tick heaven, I religiously use frontline, because while it does pose some risks, the risks of tick-borne diseases are much worse. Essentially, we are never going to escape risk. But we need to make wise choices and balance risks against benefits. The risks of tick-borne diseases and certain mosquito-borne diseases are high enough, that I think the risk of endocrine disruption is worth taking. But dandelions never hurt anyone, so I'm not willing to risk cancer in my dogs just to use 2,4-D kill some little yellow flowers.

The Canadians in Ontario last year passed a ban on using pesticides for "cosmetic" uses--ie, to make lawns pretty. You can use toxic chemicals to save a life (ie, to kill mosquitos) but not just because you are too lazy to go look for a safer way to keep your lawn pretty. This seems sensible to me.

Most of the rest of the civilized world has banned these chemicals. We've become a dumping ground for stuff that Europe, Canada, and now even China has banned. They ship the stuff over to the US because most of the rest of the world doesn't want the stuff.

3 of my dogs have gotten cancer. Most of the people in my family have gotten cancer. It's really crazy--we live in a world saturated with toxic chemicals, and it's up to all of us to demand safer solutions. We have smart chemists who can design safe chemicals, if only we ask for them.

If any of you want to learn more, I just published a book TOXIC BODIES (Yale U P) which goes into depressing detail. But it's not that hard to make less risky choices, that protect our pets and children.

tiva wrote: But it's not that hard to make less risky choices, that protect our pets and children.

We weren't given a "choice" (or an education, or even a warning) where we lived for three years, or I would've never stayed there and risked that type of exposure to any of us... especially to my daughter and our dogs.Of course I can't say for certain that the pesticides caused their cancer - but it's a hell of a *coincidence*, in hindsight. It's only now that I'm even aware of this study, after looking for a "common denominator"...

Christine, I'm so sorry about your experience. You are so right that it's often impossible for us, as individuals, to make less risky choices, because these chemicals are often used without our knowledge or consent. And because it's impossible to pinpoint a single exposure, often years in the past, to a case of cancer, the chemicals go unregulated.

In the search box, type in: 2,4-D and cancer (or risk, or toxicity). 2,4-d toxicity brings up 554 studies. 2,4-d cancer brings up 176 more. 2,4-d lymphoma brings up 55 studies. You can read the abstracts at the government website, and download the full articles by going through your public library's website.

I can remember back when we lived in FL and the Albertson's grocery store had gallons of Chloradane for sale on the food shelves... That was a very toxic poison for termite control that was later outlawed.

I decided to do something today about the pesticide spraying of our city. I emailed my alderman, explaining that I have a concern, and asking for an MSDS for the pesticide.

He owns the natural remedy store in town and I met him while getting things for Vinny during Vin's illness. I also happen to know that his wife passed away in 2009 from cancer, so I'm hoping he will have an interest in this too!

For all those of you who want to talk with your towns, let them know about Ontario's recent ban on non-essential pesticides. Here's the link to the Ontario government website that explains about the ban:http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/en/land/pesticides/The Canadian Cancer Society strongly supported the ban because of the abundance of emerging research that shows strong links between many pesticides and increased risk of cancers (and reproductive and endocrine disorders). The students at my university in Wisconsin used the Ontario example to persuade our state government to institute a trial ban on university property, starting on earth day.

Well Christine, you've gone and created a monster....I received the information I requested. One of the main ingredients in the pesticide my city sprays is Permethrin. It is highly toxic and listed by the EPA as a "possible human carcinogen". There has also been a link found between Permethrin and Parkinson's Disease.

THE FIGHT IS ON! I'm gathering all my data now and I plan to present it to the city council. I will not be deterred from this! I have checked out various natural pesticides that can be used in place of this crap. They are out there.

We are bombarded every day with a multitude of chemicals that when built up in our systems WILL cause us to get cancer. Do you all know that eventually one in two of us will develop cancer? Do you know the stats for ours pets? One in three this year will be diagnosed and once they reach the age of 10 it's almost 1 in 2. We are letting ourselves be poisoned. I'm all for a healthier America, who's with me??